Hi all

I was first fort about this when I was looking at the creation of Instanbul IGA and Berlin BER airport.

With both airports being at the bottom of the spectrum when it comes to the london airports according to latest poles would it make sense to close one and improve/expand the other to create a larger airport to serve the region.

This comes apparent since in going reconfigurations and upgrades to the old LTN terminal is quite freqent so they can meet demand for customers and expansion.

Some of the benefits to this would be that one of the two sites the airport was would have no planes meaning noise would probably effect less people and the area can be used for something else, Also it would be better for airlines setting up based or hubs for connections and so on

However this would mean people living in the local area will have to travel further to work or will have to resign aswell as how it will effect local industries and if they might relocate.

Why? They are as far apart as LHR and LGW.

It would cost a whole lot of money to close both airports and build a new one. And for what? Both airports are running at full capacity, it's not like they need to add up their flights. Each of them has the right to exist individually.

All of those so called benefits mentioned here are not an issue at either Luton or Stansted. The airlines serving them aren't into hubs for connections or anything like that.

All London airports can co exist. I'd argue expansion is actually needed at all of them as they are all pretty much bursting at the seams.

There is also not a very good road network heading east/west between these two regions unless you drop down to the congested M25.

Will never happen.. no hope of building a mega airport in southern England.

The rail link from London direct into Luton airport is being constructed.
Difficult to expand Luton much further, there is a huge cliff at one end of the runway for a start.

You could probably squeeze in another parallel runway at Stansted sometime in the future. Stansted has good rail and motorway links with East London.

Both are running near capacity at peak times..

I see EasyJet and Ryanair are now using ‘London Southend’ airport.. again that has no room for expansion and a fairly short runway...

Maybe we should park an aircraft carrier in the River Thames?.. oh that would get in the way of London City Airport

There’s loads of room to make Stansted a mega airport. That was the whole idea of the 1980s rebuild. Zero ROI of course but you live and learn.

What we really need is Exeter to become a mega hub...

In all seriousness, they serve slightly different markets, and Stansted is awful to get to from the Midlands whilst Luton is just awful in general.

LTN and STN serve quite different geographies in the UK. Where I live LTN is my local airport. STN is however probably closer than LHR but it is a nightmare to get to.

What London needs is a 3rd runway at LHR, and permission to land on the grass abeam the taxiing A380 at LGW

That would be one hell of a long taxiway.

In some ways Luton should have a thread of its own (not that I live there).They have broken ground on the new 'DART' automated rail connection from Luton Station.This will mean London to terminal in 30 mins!But of course that railway comes from the north as well making it a well connected airport.Of course it already has the M1 on its doorstep making it well connected for car and coach.
They are looking to expand it to circa 38 nm pax without a new or extended runway - but one or two new terminals.Its not trying to be a long distance airport the runway is not long enough but will become a major European connecting airport imho.

LTN is very restricted geographically, limited growth.
STN is a solid candidate for a future 2nd runway and lots more growth, definitely room there for that.

I don't see any new airports being built in SE England ever (or at least in the rest of my life)

East Midlands would be fun to see more stuff at.

The SE of England needs more capacity, not less. Why on earth would anyone want to merge the limited capacity into fewer spaces? Because the OP is a cheerleader for one airport, or another.

I think it would be better to construct an airport nearer to Bedford with a high speed link. Luton is not really suitable for expanding . Runway is too short and on top of a hill etc. They should have converted the old bae Bedford or Hatfield rather than use Luton .

I grew up near Bedford and remember the idea of turning RAE Thurleigh into London's third airport. The NIMBYs wrote all over rural bus shelters 'London Airport number three, go and stick it in the sea'. They must have been early adopters of Boris Island.

High chance to expand LCY as 4 runway mega hub

What would it take to link LTN and STN by rail?
Would that serve both airports and the population around it as to offer more flights and services?
A London "airport belt railway line" SEN-STN-LTN might be quite interesting.

2travel2know2 wrote:

What would it take to link LTN and STN by rail?
Would that serve both airports and the population around it as to offer more flights and services?
A London "airport belt railway line" SEN-STN-LTN might be quite interesting.

Looking at how HS2 planning went, I wouldn't hold my breath!

2travel2know2 wrote:

What would it take to link LTN and STN by rail?
Would that serve both airports and the population around it as to offer more flights and services?
A London "airport belt railway line" SEN-STN-LTN might be quite interesting.

Why? What percentage of the flying public lands at one airport and depart from another when making a connection? Especially in London with five airports.

EvanWSFO wrote:

2travel2know2 wrote:

What would it take to link LTN and STN by rail?
Would that serve both airports and the population around it as to offer more flights and services?
A London "airport belt railway line" SEN-STN-LTN might be quite interesting.

Why? What percentage of the flying public lands at one airport and depart from another to make a connection. Especially in London with five airports.

How many people per working day want to get from Southend to Chelmsford to Bishop Stortford to Stevenage to Luton without having to make train, tube, train interchanges in London?
One sees it as linking airports, others as linking major East-North London suburban communities by rail.

2travel2know2 wrote:

EvanWSFO wrote:

2travel2know2 wrote:

What would it take to link LTN and STN by rail?
Would that serve both airports and the population around it as to offer more flights and services?
A London "airport belt railway line" SEN-STN-LTN might be quite interesting.

Why? What percentage of the flying public lands at one airport and depart from another to make a connection. Especially in London with five airports.

How many people per working day want to get from Southend to Chelmsford to Bishop Stortford to Stevenage to Luton without having to make train, tube, train interchanges in London?
One sees it as linking airports, others as linking major East-North London suburban communities by rail.

This still doesn't address the need to link airports. Infrastructure anywhere is important and in most places could be improved. I'm just saying it seems costly to add dedicated links between airports which have likely miniscule numbers of changing airports to make connections.

EvanWSFO wrote:

Why? What percentage of the flying public lands at one airport and depart from another when making a connection? Especially in London with five airports.

As it is now, very few. However a connecting railway between the airports could change that.

EvanWSFO wrote:

This still doesn't address the need to link airports. Infrastructure anywhere is important and in most places could be improved. I'm just saying it seems costly to add dedicated links between airports which have likely miniscule numbers of changing airports to make connections.

As a matter of fact, it does. Suppose you live near one airport, but your flight departs from another. No matter, you just go to your local airport and get on the train to the other airport from there.

Linking the airports could also make several flights redundant. As it is now, EasyJet flies from Amsterdam to Gatwick, Stansted, Luton and Southend. Allright, Gatwick is perhaps too far off but with Luton, Stansted and Southend linked they could merge three flights into one. Let's say that one flight is going to Stansted, but you would prefer to go to Luton. No matter, you fly into Stansted and take the train to Luton from there. And then you get on to your destination as you would have done if you would have landed in Luton.

A new runway at STN to the East and more terminal and aircraft parking space could be great for Greater London, I like STN airport and I think it's a great option if you want to travel to/from London.
Luton has a lot of space to grow also to the south and to the east, however not having a train station at the terminal is not very convinient, so maybe a new terminal south of the current runways and extend the rail line and a new south runways will be great, also I think STN need to build taxiways to the runway thresholds to increase runway capacity.

migair54 wrote:

Luton has a lot of space to grow also to the south and to the east

On a map it might look like there's a lot of space, but that's unusable since Luton is on a hill and that terrain is much lower. It's pretty steep, specially to the east. Breachwood Green is down in the valley, at least 50 meters lower than the airport. Chiltern Green is also lower.

This map shows it off quite nice:

http://www.floodmap.net/Elevation/Eleva ... gi=2643339

Listen, there was this event known as Brexit that will reduce demand for flights once implemented. Easyjet was one of the stocks down the most when the vote went down. Revamping air infrastructure in the face of this is not a priority.

Not to mention that the airport boundary is crossing county lines and the mp for Herts is massively against he airport expansion which Bedfordshire county council own . There was an idea of a second runway to the south but with some very expensive towns like St Albans and Harlesden etc near by it wasn’t a very popular idea

How can you merge 3 Easyjet AMS flights into 1 ?!

I don’t see the point of some expensive rail line linking up LTN - STN - SEN.. from what I know these are not hub airports.. people are not flying into catch other flights to elsewhere.
Heathrow is London’s hub airport for connecting traffic hence the agreement to build the third runway there.
However.. from what I can see, plonking down a runway north of Heathrow is going to be a massive undertaking with little return on investment.. BA are are against the idea.. would not be surprised if it never happens.. meanwhile the South of England runs out of runway capacity.
Second runways at Stansted and Gatwick are a lot easier to build..

Then there is always that big runway at Manston in Kent.. with that airport currently closed. .

flyingphil wrote:

I don’t see the point of some expensive rail line linking up LTN - STN - SEN.. from what I know these are not hub airports.. people are not flying into catch other flights to elsewhere.

No, but you can make it more convenient for the O/D passengers that don't need to be in London. For example Luton attracts a lot of passengers from the south Midlands like Milton Keynes, Northampton and even as far as Coventry or Leicester. But these passengers don't go to Stansted and Southend as that's too inconvenient for them. But what if they can drive to Luton, get on the train to Stansted or even Southend and fly from there with the same ease as flying from Luton?

On the other hand, someone from Chelmsford has Stansted and Southend nearby, but isn't likely to go to Luton. But what if his flight leaves from Luton? With that train, he can easily go to either Stansted or Southend and then take the train to Luton. Then he can fly from Luton with the same ease as flying from Stansted or Southend. Stansted attracts passengers from as far as Cambridge and Ipswich.

andymartin wrote:

How can you merge 3 Easyjet AMS flights into 1 ?!

By flying into one destination instead of three, and using the train to get your passengers from the one served destination to the two unserved.

chunhimlai wrote:

High chance to expand LCY as 4 runway mega hub

I missed your proposals. You should start a new thread with this 4-runway LCY. What ever happened to 6-runway EXT?

SCQ83 wrote:

I missed your proposals. You should start a new thread with this 4-runway LCY. What ever happened to 6-runway EXT?

You want any proposals? Here it is:



The airport ring railway line, connecting Southend, Stansted, Luton, Heathrow and Gatwick.

Since all airports are linked together, passengers are no longer bound to one airport. O/D passengers can get to their nearest airport, hop on the train to their airport of departure and fly from there. Connecting passengers can see from what airport their connecting flight departs, hop on the train and catch their connecting flight. This would eliminate the need for airlines to stick to one specific airport, they can use any airport since ultimately they're all connected.

PatrickZ80 wrote:

SCQ83 wrote:

I missed your proposals. You should start a new thread with this 4-runway LCY. What ever happened to 6-runway EXT?

You want any proposals? Here it is:



The airport ring railway line, connecting Southend, Stansted, Luton, Heathrow and Gatwick.

Since all airports are linked together, passengers are no longer bound to one airport. O/D passengers can get to their nearest airport, hop on the train to their airport of departure and fly from there. Connecting passengers can see from what airport their connecting flight departs, hop on the train and catch their connecting flight. This would eliminate the need for airlines to stick to one specific airport, they can use any airport since ultimately they're all connected.

Please God make it stop.

To the OP. What is the obsession on Anet to closing multiple airports and building new gigantic ones? This is almost as bad as closing NYC airports and PHL and building a mega airport in between.

That rail journey from LGW to STN would take longer than a flight to IST, and cost about the same too.

Another airlines.net thread degenerates into a fantasy land. Hilariously off the wall from the pateneted “Fanboy bingo”’game, including my old favourite, “high speed rail link”.
Not one human being in SE England will give you credibility if you use that phrase. You guys are just embarrasing yourselves, please make it stop.

There is almost ZERO demand for rail travel between LTN/STN/SEN/LGW, nothing even approaching a business case. As for easyJet consolidating flights at a bigger airport, NO, that’s the whole opposite of what they do.

SCQ83 wrote:

chunhimlai wrote:

High chance to expand LCY as 4 runway mega hub

I missed your proposals. You should start a new thread with this 4-runway LCY. What ever happened to 6-runway EXT?

I would say “higher chance” for 4runway LCY than combine STN and LTN

The value hubs give the inhabitants of a city is lower cost and more destinations at the cost of more pollution and more congestion (as people are using the airports and airspace but just to go through) There are also benefits to the private airport owners and private airlines which may have a tax benefit (although in the UK that benefit would not go to the city but to the national coffers)

So what exciting new destinations would a new London hub open? (My guess is SYD is the largest unserved market, but I don't think that or similar are not serving LON due to the lack of a hub, what is the actual largest practical one, Hawaii?)

Or would it change the fares, which are already mostly tax for so many destinations, that any change to base fare is almost meaningless.

There is no point linking airports together by trains, there may be reasons to link other places to airports by more train lines, but the UK airports are already terrible places to drive to, driving to an airport to simply get a train to another would not be wise. And in any case London would get a lot more value out of trains for all the commuters.